Constructive Advisory reviews the programme, project records and contractual context to explain what delayed the works, when the delay occurred, whether it affected completion and how confidently the available evidence supports that conclusion.
Constructive Advisory provides independent construction claims, delay, programme and dispute support from Singapore for matters across Asia-Pacific and other international regions.
The analysis is selected to suit the question, data quality, contractual framework, time available and value at stake. A method is not treated as a substitute for evidence or professional judgement.
The final deliverables and information request are adjusted to the dispute stage, materiality, available records and agreed programme.
Define the decision the analysis must support, the contractual milestones, the relevant period and the required level of confidence.
Review logic, calendars, constraints, progress, revisions and contemporaneous records before selecting or relying on a method.
Identify the activities controlling completion in each relevant period and test whether each event actually affected them.
Separate fact, assumption and opinion and present the reasoning in language that commercial and legal decision-makers can use.
There is no universally correct method. The appropriate method depends on the contract, question, programme quality, records, timing of the analysis and proportionality. The method should follow the evidence, not the other way around.
Often yes, but limitations must be recognised. Alternative programme versions, updates, progress records and as-built evidence may support a reasoned assessment. The confidence of the conclusion should reflect the quality of the available data.
No. An activity can be late without delaying a contractual completion milestone. The analysis must establish the controlling path and a defensible causal link to completion or another relevant milestone.
Yes. Peer review may test methodology, data treatment, assumptions, logic, concurrency, causation and whether the conclusions are proportionate to the evidence.
Share a brief outline of the project, claim or dispute. Initial enquiries are treated in confidence and remain subject to conflict and engagement checks.